About your Search

20121208
20121208
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
or is it going to be one of those once in a generation social civil rights type cases like roe v. wade or brown v.s. board of education? and i think nobody knows. >> how much attention do you think they give to that, to public opinion? where the public stands on an issue? and growing sentiment? >> it's a great question. i mean, if you look at the evolving public opinion on this, there were polls in 2004 that were taken by gallup and "washington post" and other people that showed about 60% of the public opposed same-sex marria marriage. gallup had a poll out that showed 53% support and about 40% oppose. there are measures on state ballots around the country last month, and all for of them, the same-sex marriage side won. so the justices can see the trend. in that gallup poll, more than 70% of young people support same-sex marriage. the question is, do they see themselves stopping something they think is moving too fast? or do they want to make sure they're not behind the curve of history? >> well, it's clear that the people that were against gay marriage, they were happy about this today. even tho
ruling. if the supreme court does for gay marriage what it did for abortion and roe v. wade and said, no, this is not in the hands of the people. we're going to say there's gay marriage, that would do a lot to fire up the republican base and could turn this issue on its head and it could become a big winner for republicans because they'd feel disenfranchised. >> what about the flip side? what if the republican goes that way, their base doesn't get fired up. democrats have relied on saying to some voters, that other party is not with you. if the republican got with them, does that take this off the table for democrats? >> well, i actually think it takes it off the table and that's good news for americans in general. i mean, i think this issue is a little bit broader than politics. and i know that's weird to say here in washington, but what i think the problem with the stance that the republican party has taken right now is that it's on the wrong side of history. and we have seen throughout history that when there's a group of people that want to deny another group of people less rights an
angeles. >>> headquarters in atlanta this is "early start weekend." some are calling it the next roe v. wade. the issue the u.s. supreme court agreed to take on that will make history. >> all of those who argued for nonintervention because of the things that might happen have now happened because we failed to intervene. >>> when is enough enough? that is the question many are asking about syria as the death toll climbs and concerns mount over chemical weapons and some lawmakers are saying it is too late to stop mass destruction. >>> what is going on with netflix? another major blunder by the ceo. why he is being investigated by the ccc. >>> it is saturday, december 8th. good morning, everyone. i'm randi kaye. victor blackwell is off today. we start with a landmark decision by the supreme court. the justices decided to hear two ca cases. joe johns has a look. >> randi, after weeks of speculation the court decided to take up two cases on same-sex marriage. the first one about the defensive marriage act. windsor against the united states. they were married in toronto, canada, in 2007. spi
by the supreme court could result in the roe v. wade of guy rights. joining me now is political strategist steve elmendorf and chris geithner, senior political reporter for buzz feed. steve, i want to go to you first on this. there has been a lot of discussion and a lot of back and forth whether it's a good thing for marriage equality for the supreme court to take up these issues. some folks think better to leave it at the state level. there has been a lot of progress there. are you bullish or bearish on this? >> i'm bullish. i think the supreme court is going to do the right thing. you know, it's hard to predict, but i think the country has been moving so fast in the right direction. the court is not immune to public opinion. the court is not immune to the wind blowing through the country. and it's so clear where we're moving and the progress we've made in the last five years has been amazing. and i think the court is going to do the right thing. >> chris, let's talk a little bit about public opinion. because we have some polling that shows a breathtaking change of public opinion on this. in 20
. if it did that, that might result in what would essentially be the roe v. wade of gay rights. alex. >> taking up this prop 8 with california, would their ruling necessarily apply then only to california? >> that's possible. it's possible, because the appeals court ruling that comes to the supreme court was designed to apply only to california. what it said is once a state grants an essential right like this, it can't then take it away. remember in 2008 early in the year, this california supreme court permitted same-sex couples to get married, about 18,000 of them did. then prop 8 was passed in the general election putting a stop to it. so if the court just stops there, you're right. it would be a ruling that would apply only to california. if it decides to take that case and get to the constitutional question of whether any state for any reason can deny same-sex marriage couples the right to get married, then it would play nationwide. >> good to see you, pete. thank you. >> you bet. my pleasure. >> now the question of the day. what do you expect the supreme court to do on gay marri
. >>> some are calling it the next "roe v. wade" or brown versus board of education. the issue the u.s. supreme court agreed to take on that will make history. >>> all of those who argued for non-intervention because of the things that might happen have now happened because we failed to intervene. >> when is enough enough? that is the question many are asking about syria as the death toll climbs and concerns mount over chemical weapons. now some lawmakers are saying it may be too late to stop mass destruction. >>> and could this be the end of "gangnam style" mania? why pop sensation psy is apologizing for some anti-american lyrics. [ telephones ringing ] at chevy's year-end event, we have 11 vehicles that offer an epa-estimated 30 mpg highway or better. yeah? hey. hey. where's your suit? oh, it's casual friday. oh. [ male announcer ] chevy's giving more. this holiday season, get a 2013 malibu ls for around $199 per month, or get $1,000 holiday bonus cash. it's hard to see opportunity in today's challenging environment. unless you have the right perspective. bny mellon wealth manageme
headquarters in atlanta, this is "cnn saturday morning." some are calling it the next roe v. wade or brown v. board of education. the issue the u.s. supreme court agreed to take on that will make history. >> all of those who argued for nonintervention because of the things that might happen have now happened because we failed to intervene. >>> when is enough enough? that is the question many are asking about syria, as the death toll climbs and concerns mount over chemical weapons. now some lawmakers are saying it may be too late to stop mass destruction. >>> and a toddler taken from the only parents she ever knew because of a little known federal law. now they're fighting to get her back, and may be on their way to the supreme court. i'll talk with them live. >>> good morning, everyone. i'm randi kaye. it is 10:00 on the east coast, 7:00 on the west. thanks so much for starting your day with us. it was supposed to be just for laughs. humor. the listeners with a lighthearted prank. two radio deejays called the london hospital where the duchess of cambridge was being treated and tricked a nurs
of the same-sex marriage issue. that might result in what would essentially be the roe v. wade of gay rights. >> thanks for that. >>> back to you, molly. you were doing a big piece of this for "the atlantic" for next week. what did you find most interesting in your research thus far? >> the really amazing thing about this issue is how far public opinion has come in a relatively short time on the scale of sort of large-scale social change. when gallup recently polled public opinion on gay marriage, it had the support of 53% of the american public. back in 1996 that was 27%. and that was the atmosphere in which president clinton and the congress were passing the defense of marriage act. since then, every single appellate court that has considered it has ruled against it. that's something that advocates feel very confident about the supreme court going their way. on the proposition 8 case, advocates are a little bit more nervous. this is a conservative court. and if they do rule against proposition 8 and gay marriage in california, that would strike a blow against gay marriage that could last f
decider for the nation. >> it would be the roe v. wade of our generation. >> they have their critics. conservative legal analyst ed whalen. >> there's nothing in the constitution that remotely supports a right to same-sex marriage. >> and even some of those who agree with olson and boyce say that same-sex marriage should be left to the states. >> there are lots of skeptics out there who say that you're going too quickly here and you're asking the supreme court to do a pretty heavy lift. >> every civil rights struggle, there have always been people who have said you're moving too fast, the country is not ready for it. how many people in 1954 said the country is not ready for desegregation. >> everyone says this is the conservative court. why are you doing it now? >> everybody says ted is a conservative guy. there are lots of conservative people. it would be the idea that civil rights and human rights is exclusively a liberal preserve, i think it's flat wrong. >> their clients have faith their lawyers will win. will david and ted be at the wedding? >> they better be. >> they just might
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)